Re: DMARC and ietf.org

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Jul 21, 2016, at 12:43 PM, ned+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>> On 7/21/2016 7:35 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> > Yes. So I repeat the question: Since the most pragmatic, non-purity-based
>> > solution is to rewrite the sender field for mail from p=reject (or p=quarantine)
>> > domains, when will we change the IETF and IRTF mailmen to do so?
> 
> 
>> I'm sure you really meant this, but just to be careful, what with this
>> being a technical point in a technical forum, it's worth clarifying that
>> the rewriting is for the rfc5322.from field and not the rfc5322.sender
>> field.
> 
> I have an additional suggestion.
> 
> If we're going to do this - and I'm not going to offer an opinion on whether or
> not it should be done - I'd like to see it done in a fashion that's both
> detectable and reversible. That way people using sieve or procmail or whatever
> will be able to undo the damage.
> 
> The most straightforward way to accomplish this would be to make copies of the
> original fields with different names, but of course many other approaches  are
> possible.

I do not see MailMan settings to make that happen.  Maybe I missed something...

Russ





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]